Cricket

[Pakenhamtrain]

On this first day, England first innings lasted 32.5 overs, then there were the usual breaks plus the changeover to the Australian reply which at the end of play did not even reach 40 overs.

Will any fines be imposed for paucity of overs bowled during a day's play in a Test Match?

There should be. I'd start handing out penalty runs at this point.

Based on what? The fact is that the bowlers are finding it very much to their liking.

There's not much movement. The bounce is very consistent.
It's a fine batting pitch.

 

[Haywain]

Will any fines be imposed for paucity of overs bowled during a day's play in a Test Match?

No, because if you bowl a side out within a certain number of overs (80?) the run rate isn't taken into consideration.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

No, because if you bowl a side out within a certain number of overs (80?) the run rate isn't taken into consideration.

Thanks for the clarification. 19 wickets actually fell in less than the 80 overs that you mention.

 

[SuspectUsual]

Based on what? The fact is that the bowlers are finding it very much to their liking.

Batsmen repeatedly getting out to bad shots, rather than being got out by good balls. There's negligible movement through the air, very little off the seam, and the bounce is consistent.

Look at Crawley for example - sixth ball of the series and he's playing an aggressive forcing shot off the back foot to a decent but nothing special ball. Edged and gone. Just play yourself in, take your time, and build an innings. But no, the modern way is to try and "make a statement"

More fully.....

Crawley - unnecessary aggressive shot very early in innings
Duckett - missed a straight ball
Pope - missed a straight ball
Root - undone by the change of line. Credit the bowler
Brook - got in a dither trying to decide how to play a short ball
Stokes - forgot that Starc can move the ball a bit both ways. Credit the bowler
Smith - slogging
Atkinson - no foot movement, edged behind
Carse - slogging
Wood - slogging

2/10 down to good bowling

Don't have time to go through the Aussie card now but it'll be similar

 

[Haywain]

Batsmen repeatedly getting out to bad shots, rather than being got out by good balls. There's negligible movement through the air, very little off the seam, and the bounce is consistent.

Look at Crawley for example - sixth ball of the series and he's playing an aggressive forcing shot off the back foot to a decent but nothing special ball. Edged and gone. Just play yourself in, take your time, and build an innings. But no, the modern way is to try and "make a statement"

That's one of the nineteen batsmen who were out today. Do the bowlers get no credit?

 

[SuspectUsual]

That's one of the nineteen batsmen who were out today. Do the bowlers get no credit?

I've edited my message to add a bit more - 20% of the England wickets I'd say

 

[MotCO]

14 of the 19 wickets taken were caught, with a few LBWs and bowled thrown into the mix. Is the number of catches higher than normal, and does this reflect poor batting rather than good bowling?

 

[Mikey C]

The England lower order gave the boundary fielders catching practice.

The Aussies gave a couple of soft catches off Stokes to Carse and Carey guided one to 3rd man, but the first few wickets were from excellent bowling. Archer was excellent in particular.

 

[D1511]

There should be. I'd start handing out penalty runs at this point.

If it's really about the punters getting value for money, do you really think anyone went home feeling they'd been cheated today?

If Marnus and Usman had batted out a turgid session with hardly any runs scored (a speciality of theirs) I can see the over rate argument having some traction, but not today.....

 

[Haywain]

If it's really about the punters getting value for money, do you really think anyone went home feeling they'd been cheated today?

If Marnus and Usman had batted out a turgid session with hardly any runs scored (a speciality of theirs) I can see the over rate argument having some traction, but not today.....

Quite. I am a critic of poor over rates but you can't expect to see 19 wickets fall and still see 90 overs. There should probably be a set allowance for time per wicket and review to make more sense of this

 

[SuspectUsual]

Quite. I am a critic of poor over rates but you can't expect to see 19 wickets fall and still see 90 overs. There should probably be a set allowance for time per wicket and review to make more sense of this

There is. Two minutes per wicket, so we lost 38 minutes due to wickets today, which is about 9 or 10 overs based on 15 in an hour / 90 in a day

(I don't think any of the wickets were the last ball of a session - if so reduce slightly)

EDIT - I was being daft, its 36 minutes so exactly 9 overs - the final England wicket doesn't get counted as that forms part of the ten minutes between innings

 

[Haywain]

There is. Two minutes per wicket, so we lost 38 minutes due to wickets today, which is about 9 or 10 overs based on 15 in an hour / 90 in a day

Is that part of the over rate calculations? Genuinely, I don't know.

 

[SuspectUsual]

Is that part of the over rate calculations? Genuinely, I don't know.

Section 12.9 of the latest ICC test match playing conditions

Tried copying and pasting it but the formatting somehow goes haywire, but https://images.icc-cricket.com/imag...1*1ny7aod*_gcl_au*MTY2NzIxMDI2LjE3NjM3MjgyOTA. is the link to the document, but specifically 12.9.3.6 says "2 minutes per wicket taken, provided that such wicket results in the subsequent batters immediately commencing his innings. For the avoidance of any doubt, no time allowance will be given for the final wicket of an innings or where a wicket falls immediately prior to any interval"

 

[bspahh]

Section 12.9 of the latest ICC test match playing conditions

Tried copying and pasting it but the formatting somehow goes haywire, but https://images.icc-cricket.com/imag...1*1ny7aod*_gcl_au*MTY2NzIxMDI2LjE3NjM3MjgyOTA. is the link to the document, but specifically 12.9.3.6 says "2 minutes per wicket taken, provided that such wicket results in the subsequent batters immediately commencing his innings. For the avoidance of any doubt, no time allowance will be given for the final wicket of an innings or where a wicket falls immediately prior to any interval"

This is section 12.9:

12.9 Minimum Over Rates

12.9.1 The minimum over rate to be achieved in Matches shall be 15 overs per hour.​

12.9.2 The actual over rate shall be calculated at the end of the match by the umpires and shall be the average rate which is achieved by the fielding team across both of the batting team’s innings.​

12.9.3 In calculating the actual over rate for the match, allowances will be given as follows:​

12.9.3.1 The time lost as a result of treatment given to a player by an authorised medical personnel on the field of play;​

12.9.3.2 The time lost as a result of a player being required to leave the field as a result of a serious injury;​

12.9.3.3 The time taken for all third umpire referrals and consultations and any umpire or player reviews;​

12.9.3.4 The time lost as a result of time wasting by the batting side; and​

12.9.3.5 The time lost due to all other circumstances that are beyond the control of the fielding side.​

12.9.3.6 2 minutes per wicket taken, provided that such wicket results in the subsequent batters immediately commencing his innings. For the avoidance of any doubt, no time allowance will be given for the final wicket of an innings or where a wicket falls immediately prior to any interval;​

12.9.3.7 4 minutes per drinks break taken.​

12.9.4 The following conditions shall also be factored into the over rate calculation at the end of the match:​

12.9.4.1 if the fielding team bowls out the batting team in 80 overs or less in any particular innings and the Minimum Over Rate requirement for that innings has not been exceeded (taking into account all of the time allowances described above), no account shall be taken of the actual over rate in that innings when calculating the actual over rate at the end of such Match.​

12.9.4.2 if the fielding team bowls out the batting team twice and has not completed more than 160 overs in total across both of its fielding innings, no sanction may be imposed in respect of a breach of clause 12.9.1.​

12.9.4.3 if the fielding team has not completed more than 80 overs in a Match, no sanction may be imposed in respect of a breach of clause 12.9.1.​

12.9.5 The current over rate of the fielding team (+/– overs compared to the minimum rate required), shall be advised by the third umpire every 30 minutes as a minimum, and shall be displayed on a scoreboard or replay screen at regular intervals.​

12.9.6 If, at the end of the match, the over rate calculation determines that a team has bowled one or more overs less than the minimum over rate requirement, that team will incur one Penalty Over for each full over the team falls short of its minimum over rate required in a match.​

 

[Haywain]

This is section 12.9:

That makes everything clear!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There is. Two minutes per wicket, so we lost 38 minutes due to wickets today, which is about 9 or 10 overs based on 15 in an hour / 90 in a day

(I don't think any of the wickets were the last ball of a session - if so reduce slightly)

EDIT - I was being daft, its 36 minutes so exactly 9 overs - the final England wicket doesn't get counted as that forms part of the ten minutes between innings

So your total net figure of wicket changes of 90 overs minus those 10 overs you mention above would give a reduced total of 80 overs

The total overs bowled by Australia and England on the first day only came to 71.5 overs, so what happened to the missing 8 overs?

 

[kje7812]

Were any decisions reviewed? I'm fairly sure time is allowed for player reviews.

 

[bspahh]

So your total net figure of wicket changes of 90 overs minus those 10 overs you mention above would give a reduced total of 80 overs

The total overs bowled by Australia and England on the first day only came to 71.5 overs, so what happened to the missing 8 overs?

Unless the last pair of Australian batsmen last another 41 overs, the missing overs will be gone, as section 12.9.4.1 says the over rate penalties are only applied for innings that last for more than 80 overs. The England innings is definitely fine.

 

[Haywain]

The total overs bowled by Australia and England on the first day only came to 71.5 overs, so what happened to the missing 8 overs?

Rounded up, that's 72 overs. Then add 2 or 3(not sure which) for the change of innings so probably only 3 or 4 short of the required number.

 

[SuspectUsual]

So your total net figure of wicket changes of 90 overs minus those 10 overs you mention above would give a reduced total of 80 overs

The total overs bowled by Australia and England on the first day only came to 71.5 overs, so what happened to the missing 8 overs?

2 overs for the change of innings

Time for each use of DRS, depends on each specific review's duration but the 4th ump times them

At least one batsman clanged on the head needing a physio and change of helmet

It all adds up!

 

[Haywain]

Time for each use of DRS, depends on each specific review's duration but the 4th ump times them

At least one batsman clanged on the head needing a physio and change of helmet

As a paying spectator at test matches, I think cricket needs to be clearer about these things in the same way it is now about DRS. The current system of showing the over rate 'in progress' just leads to meaningless numbers being shown and a complete lack of understanding about deductions.

 

[SuspectUsual]

As a paying spectator at test matches, I think cricket needs to be clearer about these things in the same way it is now about DRS. The current system of showing the over rate 'in progress' just leads to meaningless numbers being shown and a complete lack of understanding about deductions.

Yeah, I totally agree.

 

[Bald Rick]

If it's really about the punters getting value for money, do you really think anyone went home feeling they'd been cheated today?

I gather that the beer was expensive and not very good…

 

[Haywain]

I gather that the beer was ... not very good…

Standard for Australia!

 

[Mikey C]

Standard for Australia!

The Barmy Army did make a decent beer snake at least

 

[Pakenhamtrain]

I gather that the beer was expensive and not very good…

Its mid strength that costs a fortune so ****. Still cold though.

20251122-123559 hosted at ImgBB

Image 20251122-123559 hosted on ImgBB

ibb.co

Meanwhile Saturday arvo in Edinburgh Park in Fitzroy the TV is out for the cricket.

I myself will be trundling to the pub in due corse.

Which has now arrived

20251122-141611 hosted at ImgBB

Image 20251122-141611 hosted on ImgBB

ibb.co

Right now Australia need England to do a Melbourne vs St Kilda in Round 20

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Day 2 saw the final Australian 1st innings wicket to fall leaving them 132 all out (45.2 overs) ... Lyon c Duckett b Carse 4

Crawley must wonder where he is as when England start their 2nd innings, as he is C & b Starc 0, lasting just 5 balls..

 

[Pakenhamtrain]

Id beat my head against the wall at Australian tactics to the tail but im at the pub.

Also England are 8/154

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Archer has just been caught. Not yet the tea interval and England have lost nine 2nd innings wickets. Wood last man to come in.

 

[Pakenhamtrain]

And England are out for 164.

Setting Australia 205.

If Australia had good batsmen then yea its a walk in the park.

Australia does not have such batsmen